Skip to main content
Glama
Sign In
mcp-abap-adt

mcp-abap-adt

by fr0ster
OverviewSchemaSourceRelated ServersDiscussionsAdmin
TypeScript
Remote

CheckPackage

Runs a syntax check on an ABAP package and returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages to help identify code issues before deployment.

Instructions

[read-only] Runs a syntax check on the ABAP package named by package_name. Returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages. Recordable: in batch mode a call is recorded under the next number and answers with empty content; its answer is read by number after the batch ends.

Tool call template

Replace each placeholder with a value matching the input schema. Only required parameters are included; add optional parameters as needed.

{
  "id": 1,
  "jsonrpc": "2.0",
  "method": "tools/call",
  "params": {
    "arguments": {
      "package_name": "<package_name>"
    },
    "name": "CheckPackage"
  }
}

Input Schema

NameRequiredDescriptionDefault
package_nameYesPackage name.
super_packageNoOptional, and not read by the check endpoint — see CheckPackageLow. Requiring it refused the call before any request was made, for a package with no parent.

Schema Changelog

Changes observed during successful MCP inspections.

  1. Changed3 schema fields changedv16.0.0
    • changedInput schema / properties / package_name / description
      Previous value: -"Package name (e.g., ZMY_PACKAGE)."New value: +"Package name."
    • changedInput schema / properties / super_package / description
      Previous value: -"Super package name (parent package)."New value: +"Optional, and not read by the check endpoint — see CheckPackageLow. Requiring it refused the call before any request was made, for a package with no parent."
    • changedInput schema / required
      Previous value: -[
-  "package_name",
-  "super_package"
-]New value: +[
+  "package_name"
+]
  2. Addedv6.5.1

TDQS

A4/5.0
Behavior4/5

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations provided, the description carries the full behavioral burden. It discloses that the operation is '[read-only]', that it returns syntax errors, warnings, and messages, and it explains the unusual batch-mode recording behavior where the call answers empty and the result is read later by number. These are meaningful traits beyond the schema, though it does not cover failure behavior or result structure in detail.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Conciseness5/5

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is three tight sentences with no waste. It front-loads the core action and read-only nature, then adds return values and batch behavior in a logical order.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Completeness4/5

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

For a check tool with no output schema, the description explains what is returned (syntax errors, warnings, messages) and covers the non-obvious batch recording semantics. The parameter details are fully covered by the schema. It could say more about failure cases or whether the check is recursive, but the essential calling information is present.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Parameters3/5

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the schema, including the caution that super_package is not read by the check endpoint. The description mentions package_name only implicitly through the package-level purpose and adds no syntax or format detail. Baseline 3 applies when the schema does the heavy lifting.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Purpose5/5

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: 'Runs a syntax check on the ABAP package named by package_name.' It distinguishes the tool from siblings like CheckProgram, CheckClass, and CheckTable by explicitly scoping the check to a package. An agent can identify the operation without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Usage Guidelines3/5

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description implies this is the package-level syntax check, but it never states when to use it versus CheckProgram, CheckClass, or CheckPackageLow. There are no exclusions or decision criteria for selecting among the many sibling Check* tools. Usage is inferable from the resource name but not explicitly guided.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.

Deploy Server

Other Tools